US/DL LGA/DCA Slot Swap Deal

[Poug Darker]

Poug,

Poug said: "But it will certainly not be good for mainline aircrews. No growth here. DCA is not a hub, but has strong O&D. Will mainline need larger aircraft or more frequency for its destinations as a result of this deal? No."

USA320Pilot comments: Poug, I believe there will be additional DCA mainline ASMs for two reasons.

1. When the original Delta-US Airways Slot Swap was announced US Airways said, "By adding 42 new peak-day departures at DCA, we will connect the nation’s capital to more small, medium, and large communities across the country. This includes adding 15 new, daily destinations to our DCA schedule including eight routes that currently have no daily nonstop service to DCA on any airline. We plan to cover all of the DCA destinations that Delta decides to discontinue as a result of this transaction.
Additionally, we’ll be adding seats, without increasing congestion, in one of the busiest airspaces in the world by significantly expanding our use of larger dual-class jets by nearly 50 percent. And to manage this increase in service, we’ll be creating approximately 100 new jobs at DCA and across the new destinations we plan to serve from DCA."

US Airways indicated the DCA expansion will expand the use of dual-class jets (first class and coach). Unless there is an Express aircraft configured to dual-class service, this additional capacity would have to be flown byu mainline aircraft with dual-class service.

2. I have been told by Station Management personnel the original plan was to split the 42 slots obtained from Delta with 30 flown by the Mainline and 12 by Express companies.

With the revised agreement and only 37 slot pairs being obtained, the Mainline/Express split will be different; however, US Airways indicated much of the flying will be done with dual-class service. I suppose US Airways could add first class to express operations; however, that would be a costly modification.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Dude, you hit the nail on the head! FC in RJ's!
Yep, comin' to a little jet near you - 1x1 seating, big comfy chairs right up front, just like the big boys have.
Already showing up on other airlines, management has already broached the subject and indicated their desire for it.
Just that pesky pilot contract that prohibits it....now how can we get around that?
Oh, I know. Let's just ignore it and do it anyway. If they notice, they'll grieve it, and we'll draw it out forever.
Our witnesses will have a headache, and won't be able to attend the hearing.
Or, our lawyer's dog ate the important papers, and won't be able to proceed for 6 months.
Or, how about we just pay off the arbitrator?
Threaten BK?
All viable options.
Dude, you can't be serious. Just because it says "dual-class", you think that means mainline. Ha, ha, ha, ha! Where have you been the last decade?
Really.

 

[Hope777]

Come on Now... We All Know that the Pilot Contract is Only to be enforced against the Wholly Owned, PSA and Piedmont. As for the Contract Carriers, 86 Seaters....Sure.
W/O 70 at best, It has been this way for years. The W/O have Always gotten the Shaft.

 

[signals]

Don't look now, but I think it is US who is being played! :unsure:

And Delta may not be immune either! :blink:

And WN continues to make pudding!

Seems like US and DAL created quite a pickle

 

[signals]

OK so most of my above discussion is happening elsewhere.

A B6 employee told me that when jetBlue went to Atlanta, DAL kicked their butt back home. Somehow I see this AA-B6 partnership a marriage of convenience. Looks like a grudge match to me, but what do I know?

 

[JayBrian]

A new article on the thread topic by our friend Ted Reed.


http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/story/10715347/1/what-delta-wants-at-laguardia.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA

 

[autofixer]

Looks like the deal is still alive:

http://www.dailyfinance.com/rtn/pr/delta-air-lines-us-airways-announce-agreement-with-four-airlines-for-transfer-of-takeoff-landing-rights-at-new-york-s-laguardia-washington-s-reagan-national-airports/rfid323932612/?channel=pf

Disregard...I was fooled by the media's laziness. I missed the date, the article is a month old. My apologies.

 

[Travelpro72]

I bet US can't wait for Jetblue to start their little shuttle service between DCA and BOS. That should keep US on their toes. I sure hope US steps up it's service and make the shuttle well.....an actual PRODUCT. HELLO????

 

[FWAAA]

DOT refuses to budge on the slot deal:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/DOT-keeps-conditions-on-US-apf-1777343301.html?x=0&.v=1

 

[Richard]

Mod note--duplicate thread on same subject was deleted.

 

[cynic]

DOT refuses to budge on the slot deal:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/DOT-keeps-conditions-on-US-apf-1777343301.html?x=0&.v=1

Not only did they reject the changes, they added the stipulation that the slots must be sold in a blind sale. The airlines can't pick the parties that buy the slots. Since only one airline was shut out of those sales initially I think it's pretty obvious as to who they want to get them. I think we're going to see a lawsuit over this one.

 

[FWAAA]

That's awfully cynical of you.

The flip side is that it's obvious that US and DL want to do everything possible to keep WN from getting their hands on them, and that's almost as devious as the government's obvious desire to see WN win.

 

[US1YFARE]

That's awfully cynical of you.

The flip side is that it's obvious that US and DL want to do everything possible to keep WN from getting their hands on them, and that's almost as devious as the government's obvious desire to see WN win.

how is a blind sale devious?

 

[back2CLT]

It's devious because the DOT's own mission statement is:

Serve the United States by ensuring a fast, safe, efficient, accessible and convenient transportation system that meets our vital national interests and enhances the quality of life of the American people, today and into the future.

Regulating fair competition has nothing to do with the authority given to them. They are overstepping their bounds. Limiting slots is ok, because it can be deemed necessary for safety and efficiency. Determing who they should or should not be limited to, is beyond that scope.

DL and US should sue, though the ultimate effect may be the same (DOJ may be granted authority and concur with the DOT's ruling)

 

[US1YFARE]

Their mission statement doesn't define the scope of their authority. I think they have broad authority to stop deceptive trade practices, which collusion would be one such practice.

A blind sale seems very fair.

 

[robbedagain]

i would not be shocked nor surprised if DL and US end this deal, which both have said they would if the govt doesnt agree to the changes. I thought it was a good deal they tried to keep one competitor out but ultimately failed cuz of the govt